Attention, gun control supporters:

[GuyPinestra]

Is it wrong to restrict ownership of fully automatic weapons to the extent that we do?

Yes.

 

[bestlink101]

taking away guns will be like prohibition, it wont work

 

[High_Gravity]

How do you propose to get criminals to obey the law?

Yell at them, give them a stern talking to and a spanking.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Sullivan Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

New York City license holders

Outside of New York City, the practices for the issuance of concealed carry licenses vary from county to county within New York State. In New York City, the licensing authority is the police department, which rarely issues carry licenses to anyone except retired police officers. Critics of the law have alleged that New Yorkers with political influence, wealth, or celebrity appear to be issued licenses more liberally.[2] In recent years, the New York Post, the New York Sun, and other newspapers have periodically obtained the list of licensees through Freedom of Information Law requests and have published the names of individuals they consider to be wealthy, famous, or politically connected that have been issued carry licenses by the city police department.[3][4]​

If you're not a retired cop, famous, wealthy, or politically connected, you have no means of defending yourself against an armed criminal who didn't bother getting a license.

You said gun laws only impact law abiding citizens. You were wrong.

Really? Let's say Joey Bagadonuts, regular guy from Queens, wants to purchase a gun because he's been mugged three times, with the last incident putting him in the hospital for a week. He applies for a permit and is denied.

Are you claiming the law has no impact on him?

Really?

He apparently didn't qualify. You want to allow anyone to purchase a handgun by eliminating all restrictions?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Like I said: "Because it makes liberals feel better".

You're governed by your emotions.

IOW, I'm right, you have no viable alternatives.

Let's look at the CN case:

Theft is illegal. The shooter stole the weapons anyway.

Murder is illegal. The shooter killed people anyway.

The guns he used were legally purchased by the person from whom he stole them. When he attempted to purchase a rifle, he was refused.

What more could be done? CN has among the strictest gun laws in the nation.

What more could be done?

By that logic there's no reason to have age limits on selling alcohol because some minors will get ahold of it anyway.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Is it wrong to restrict ownership of fully automatic weapons to the extent that we do?

Yes.

See? This is why you're going to lose more and more of your gun rights.

 

[Rinata]

How are you going to get criminals to obey the law?


I've never gotten a rational, workable answer to this question in all the years I've asked it on this and other boards.

That is a really stupid question. Obviously criminals do not obey the law or there would be no laws and no criminals!!! But at least we can make it hard for them. You right wing nuts want to make it easy. Why?? Because YOU want to carry a gun and feel important. It has nothing to do with protecting anyone. You do not want gun control because then you can't have your toy. Idiots.

 

[LeftCoastVoter]

How are you going to get criminals to obey the law?


I've never gotten a rational, workable answer to this question in all the years I've asked it on this and other boards.

What an illogical question. Using your logic, drunk driving shouldn't be illegal since drunks are going to drive drunk anyway. You're suggesting that we shouldn't pass laws because criminals are going to break them, and that makes no sense.

But they punish the offender.. they don't take the brand of car the DD used off the market

they take away his ability to drive that car legally. license suspension, increase in insurance, mandatory alcohol education classes.

they dont even have a requirement to get a license to own a fire arm.

but then again the right to drive is not listed in the constitution.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

How are you going to get criminals to obey the law?


I've never gotten a rational, workable answer to this question in all the years I've asked it on this and other boards.

That is a really stupid question. Obviously criminals do not obey the law or there would be no laws and no criminals!!! But at least we can make it hard for them. You right wing nuts want to make it easy. Why?? Because YOU want to carry a gun and feel important. It has nothing to do with protecting anyone. You do not want gun control because then you can't have your toy. Idiots.

This is why THE COURTS ALLOW VIOLENT CRIMINALS BACK OUT ON THE STREETS.
News-Talk 1110 WBT

 

[GuyPinestra]

Is it wrong to restrict ownership of fully automatic weapons to the extent that we do?

Yes.

See? This is why you're going to lose more and more of your gun rights.

Why? The $400 license isn't a deterrent to someone who wants to own a $5-10,000 gun.

The law has nothing to do with the availability of the weapon, only the PRICE limits ownership.

There are about 200,000 legally owned, fully automatic weapons in the US and you NEVER hear of one used to commit a crime.

It's not the gun, it's the USER.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

What an illogical question. Using your logic, drunk driving shouldn't be illegal since drunks are going to drive drunk anyway. You're suggesting that we shouldn't pass laws because criminals are going to break them, and that makes no sense.

But they punish the offender.. they don't take the brand of car the DD used off the market

they take away his ability to drive that car legally. license suspension, increase in insurance, mandatory alcohol education classes.

they dont even have a requirement to get a license to own a fire arm.

but then again the right to drive is not listed in the constitution.

if idiot libs have their way......watch them eventually pull SUVs off the roads....this is the same kind of thinking.....because SUVs will be a form of rolling "assault weapons"......(of course the Prez and other "special people" will still get to use them....)

 

[LeftCoastVoter]

But they punish the offender.. they don't take the brand of car the DD used off the market

they take away his ability to drive that car legally. license suspension, increase in insurance, mandatory alcohol education classes.

they dont even have a requirement to get a license to own a fire arm.

but then again the right to drive is not listed in the constitution.

if idiot libs have their way......watch them eventually pull SUVs off the roads....this is the same kind of thinking.....because SUVs will be a form of rolling "assault weapons"......(of course the Prez and other "special people" will still get to use them....)

grasping at a nice straw man argument there..... well played....

 

[DiamondDave]

What an illogical question. Using your logic, drunk driving shouldn't be illegal since drunks are going to drive drunk anyway. You're suggesting that we shouldn't pass laws because criminals are going to break them, and that makes no sense.

But they punish the offender.. they don't take the brand of car the DD used off the market

they take away his ability to drive that car legally. license suspension, increase in insurance, mandatory alcohol education classes.

they dont even have a requirement to get a license to own a fire arm.

but then again the right to drive is not listed in the constitution.

Of the INDIVIDUAL.. not everyone else too, you fucking idiot

 

[P F Tinmore]

taking away guns will be like prohibition, it wont work

What making guns illegal would do is give the lucrative gun business to organized crime on a silver platter like we did with alcohol in the 30s.

 

[P@triot]

As usual, the facts show that the idiot liberal dumbocrat is having an irrational, knee-jerk reaction to an issue they don't understand:

 

[JoeB131]

How are you going to get criminals to obey the law?


I've never gotten a rational, workable answer to this question in all the years I've asked it on this and other boards.

Most gun deaths are suicides and domestic violence murders...

removing the guns would greatly reduce gun deaths.


Japan had 11 gun homocides while we had 9158.

 

[Dick Tuck]

 

[Tuatara]

more than 2,000,000 CRIMES STOPPED by gun owners....i'd say that's effectively "overthrowing the tyrants"....

Kleck's study was deeply flawed.

I was just going to point that out.

 

[Bill Angel]

Season's Greetings from Arizona

 

[Tuatara]

Criminals do not obey the law. That's why they are called criminals. Gun Control is not an overnight solution. It would take years and the cooperation of all to eliminate the vast amount of guns available out there. Will it completely eliminate gun related crimes? Of course not. No one has even pretended to have that answer. Look at every other country with gun Control and check out their stats surrounding gun related deaths against the US's. If you believe it is not because of the easy availibilty of firearms then I would like to hear another rational idea. And don't go down the Lack of Morality or No God issue because the US has more Christians per capita so those reasons actually disprove that assertion..




But I find it odd that the overwhelming majority that support the NRA are Christians.

You're operating under some mistaken assumptions.

http://www.gunfacts.info/pdfs/gun-facts/6.1/gun_facts_6_1_screen.pdf

Myth: Countries with strict gun control have less crime
Fact: In America, we can demonstrate that private ownership of guns reduces crime, but from country to country there is no correlation between gun availability and the violent crime rate. Consider this:
Or, to use detailed data, we can contrast the per capita homicide rate with the per capita gun ownership rate between different industrialized countries (see graph below). Contrasting the data shows zero correlation between the availability of guns and the overall homicide rate.

Fact: Countries with the strictest gun-control laws also tended to have the highest homicide rates.1
Fact: According to the U.N., as of 2005, Scotland was the most violent country in the developed world, with people three times more likely to be assaulted than in America. Violent crime there has doubled over the last 20 years. 3% of Scots had been victims of assault compared with 1.2% in America.2
Fact: “... the major surveys completed in the past 20 years or more provides no evidence of any relationship between the total number of legally held firearms in society and the rate of armed crime. Nor is there a relationship between the severity of controls imposed in various countries or the mass of bureaucracy involved with many control systems with the apparent ease of access to firearms by criminals and terrorists.”3
Fact: Switzerland has relatively lenient gun control for Europe4, and has the third-lowest homicide rate of the top nine major European countries, and the same per capita rate as England and Wales.5
Fact: Indeed, the Swiss basically have a military rifle in nearly every closest. “Everybody who has served in the army is allowed to keep their personal weapon, even after the end of their military service.”6
Contact Crime Victimization Rates
Fact: “We don’t have as many guns [in Brazil] as the United States, but we use them more.”7 Brazil has mandatory licensing, registration, and maximum personal ownership quotas. It now bans any new sales to private citizens. Their homicide rate is almost three (3) times higher than the U.S.8
Fact: In Canada around 1920, before there was any form of gun control, their homicide rate was 7% of the U.S rate. By 1986, and after significant gun control legislation, Canada’s homicide rate was 35% of the U.S. rate – a significant increase. 9 In 2003, Canada had a violent crime rate more than double that of the U.S. (963 vs. 475 per 100,000).10
Fact: Many of the countries with the strictest gun control have the highest rates of violent crime. Australia and England, which have virtually banned gun ownership, have the highest rates of robbery, sexual assault, and assault with force of the top 17 industrialized countries.11
Fact: The crime rate is 66% higher in four Canadian Prairie Provinces than in the northern US states across the border.12
Fact: Strict controls over existing arms failed in Finland. Despite needs-based licensing, storage laws and transportation restrictions,13 Finland experienced a multiple killing school shooting in 2007.14​

Myth: The availability of guns causes crime
Fact: Though the number of firearms owned by private citizens has been increasing steadily since 1970, the overall rate of homicides and suicides has not risen.169 As the chart shows, there is no correlation between the availability of firearms and the rates of homicide and suicide in America.
Fact: Internationally speaking “There’s no clear relationship between more guns and higher levels of violence.”170
Fact: “... a detailed study of the major surveys completed in the past 20 years or more provides no evidence of any relationship between the total number of legally held firearms in society and the rate of armed crime. Nor is there a relationship between the severity of controls imposed in various countries or the mass of bureaucracy involved with many control systems with the apparent ease of access to firearms by criminals and terrorists.”171
Handguns, Homicides and Suicides
Fact: Handgun ownership among groups normally associated with higher violent crime (young males, blacks, low income, inner city, etc.) is at or below national averages.172
Fact: The most significant correlation between the use of guns in the commission of crimes occur when parents (27.5% of inmates) abuse drugs or have friends engaged in illegal activities (32.5% with robberies and 24.3% for drug trafficking).173
Fact: Five out of six gun-possessing felons obtained handguns from the secondary market andby theft, and “[the] criminal handgun market is overwhelmingly dominated by informal transactions and theft as mechanisms of supply.”174
Fact: The majority of handguns in the possession of criminals are stolen, and not necessarily by the criminals in question.175 In fact, over 100,000 firearms are stolen in burglaries every year, and most of them likely enter the criminal market (i.e., sold or traded to criminals).176
Fact: In 1968, the U.K. passed laws that reduced the number of licensed firearm owners, and thus reduced firearm availability. U.K. homicide rates have steadily risen since then.177 Ironically, firearm use in crimes has doubled in the decade after the U.K. banned handguns.178
Fact: Most violent crime is caused by a small minority of repeat offenders. One California study found that 3.8% of a group of males born in 1956 were responsible for 55.5% of all serious felonies.179 75-80% of murder arrestees have prior arrests for a violent (including non-fatal) felony or burglary. On average they have about four felony arrests and one felony conviction.
Fact: Half of all murders are committed by people on “conditional release” (i.e., parole or probation).180 81% of all homicide defendants had an arrest record; 67% had a felony arrest record; 70% had a conviction record; and 54% had a felony conviction.181
Fact: Per capita firearm ownership rates have risen steadily since 1959 while crime rates have gone up and down depending on economics, drug trafficking innovations, and “get tough” legislation.182
Thoughts: Criminals are not motivated by guns. They are motivated by opportunity. Attempts to reduce public access to firearms provide criminals more points of opportunity. It is little wonder that high-crime cities also tend to be those with the most restrictive gun control laws – which criminals tend to ignore.​

So many flaws in these reports espicially when the gun violence stats are swapped for "violent stats". Someone spent a lot of time cherry picking stats to fit their agenda. Seriously, comparing 1920 stats to 2003 stats. That's reaching.